Could they change the 1914 doctrine this way?

by AK - Jeff 26 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  SirNose586

  You've got quite the gift for speaking Watchtowerese. But remember to throw in some "the original Greek word"-type phrases!

  In my opinion, they've got way too much invested in 1914 to change it. They know it grows more ridiculous by the year, but the 1914 date is also shrouded in the mists of time. No one is around to question it. They base their fraudulent claim of authority on 1918/1919. If they want to ditch it, then they can expect more of a disillusionment from dropping 1914 than the generation change of 1995.

  I mean, I can understand that concerning when Jesus came as king in heavenly power, they could change it to suit their needs. But they can't undermine their own authority, no matter how ridiculous the logic, or how ancient the date.
• 

  Mary

  A friend and I were discussing the possible means by which the WTS could drop 1914, the last remaining significant prophetic flop-date to which they cling. I believe they will feel compelled to do so, and I believe they will do so within the next 5 years.

  One way they could do it, without sounding like they were completely off their rockers, is by revealing that Jerusalem was actually destroyed in 587 BCE, not 607 BCE. That would push up the date of 'Jesus' invisible return' to 1934, thereby giving them an extension on 'the last days". As for how they would continue to promote the idea that Jesus chose them as the F&DSC, well, I don't think that would be too much of a problem. They pulled 1919 out of a hat without having any scriptural backing whatsoever. And people swallowed it. It wouldn't take too much creative writing for them to simply pull another date out of a date and plunk it on the masses. They could actually say something to the effect that, while the Slave Class had formed in the early part of the 20th century, they weren't "approved" until the late 1930s, because up until then, they were still celebrating Xmas, birthdays, etc.

  And as Jeff said, they could still say that 1914 was a turning point in mankind's history (which it was), but that "new light" has revealed these new "refinements of truth, blah, blah, blah." While a number of Witnesses would definitely be bewildered and upset at the change (just as they were after the bombshell in the November 1995 WT where they dropped 'this generation'), the majority would probably just accept this new and improved version of 'truth'.
• 

  avidbiblereader

  They pulled 1919 out of a hat without having any scriptural backing whatsoever. And people swallowed it.

  Kind of like the trumpet blasts in Rev and all these signigicant things just meaning assemblies and resolutions.

  I think the 1914 date is going to be too hard to pull off, almost everything they teach hinges on this teaching, this is equivelant to churches changing the Trinity,but great writing Jeff.

  abr
• 

  drew sagan

  Personally I do not think they will get rid of 1914. They have done such a good job at keeping the flock ignorant as regards their past interpretations as well as their past failures.
  
  1914 is one of a few carrots that are hung in front of the JWs to keep them going. It serves a number of purposes, all which have the goal of making a person believe that something amazing and special is happening in their lifetime, something that revolves around the Watchtower organization.
  
  I think the current trends in their publications (like 'What does the Bible Really Teach') show that they simply have a desire to keep the average member caught up in the emotional hype while intellectual study is thrown out the window. The days of long drawn out discussions on 1914 are gone. They have been replaced by 'holy crap this world is crazy, some really big s**t is goning down real soon, quick follow the people that said it would happen'.
• 

  stillajwexelder

  And it would be exactly their style to drop a theological bombshell like that in a "Questions From Readers". Their whole theology hinges on 1914. And they arrive at that date based on a false date of Jerusalem's destruction. That religion is more screwed up than chocolate cornbread.

  It will therefore have to wait until 2008 at earliest when the new Public WT and JW WT are published. This will NOT be in a public WT
• 

  sir82

  Don't the Adventists still "officially" recognize 1844 as some sort of key date, even though they don't publicize it much any more?

  Seems to me the Society could do something similar - even though the date 1914 is increasingly receding into the background, they could still occasionally reference it. I'm sure it will virtually disappear from the "1st of the month, for the public" WTs beginning in 2008.

  They already kind of do something like this now - whenever they have an article trying to "prove" we are in the last days, they point to world events as more of a "proof" than their tortured chronology. The chronology is currently in more a "supporting" role.

  On the other hand, there will likely be some sort of repercussion as the 100th anniversary of the date draws near. They will be forced to "commemorate" it some way, much as they did with the July 1 1979 Watchtower mag. And drawing JWs attention to it could very well have a huge negative impact on the R&F (did Jesus prophesy about "the last days" or "the last centuries"?).

  If they're smart, they'll just kind of quietly push 1914 into the background. However, their decsions of late seem to be remarkably stupid and short-sighted*, so who knows what will happen?

  * Examples: "Let's discourage any advanced education whatsoever, thus ensuring that any few JW youth who remain in the org. will be poor and frustrated...let's intentionally murk up our teachings on blood, blood fractions, and transfusions...let's lay the hammer down on associating with D-F'ed relatives...let's bore long-term JWs out of their minds by studying the Revelation book for the 4th time, even though virtually every page will require some sort of 'adjustment'...blah blah blagggh"
• 

  MinisterAmos

  1914 was an important year for another reason. Armageddon was supposed to happen in October of that year. When it did not it was changed to the invisible coming. Check "Herald" 2/1915 for the apology.
• 

  Gill

  Stillajwexelder - Good thinking about the 2008 Watchtowers! This is where ALL the bombshells are going to appear! Can hardly wait!
• 

  Emma

  Light getting brighter? Sounds like its fading fast.
• 

  Gill

  or perhaps they'll keep the 1914 doctrine but bring in that' a day is like a thousand years to Jehovah!' That could extend the wait for Armageddon to over 900 more years!!